Wednesday 24 February 2016

An Open Letter to Justice C. S. Karnan


Dear Hon’ble Justice C. S. Karnan,

I know it, sir.  Writing to a judge on his views expressed in court about a case coming up before him is not good manners. But one may say things to a judge on what he says outside the court on other matters – for example, on music or on the condition of court buildings.

Sir, last week you came out of your hallowed seat of the Madras High Court, addressed press persons at its gates and became the centre of news stories across India. They made a sad reading, particularly your accusations against your brother judges, the Chief Justice of the High Court, the Chief Justice of India and some judges of the Supreme Court. I wish to say a few things, in grief and in goodwill. I would just touch upon a thing or two from what you spoke.  What I say here is relevant, though not central to what you were announcing that day.

       By now everyone knows you are a member of the Scheduled Castes, as you said to newsmen.  A lawyer arguing before your court or his client in the case would not be concerned about that fact.  The reason is simple.  The most important thing for any such lawyer or client in any court is this: he should get a judgement that pleases him. If a litigant’s case has merits and he gets a final judgement favouring him the winning party and his lawyer will admire the judge, but the losing party, or at least his lawyer who should know better, will also have respect for the judge for a fair judgement.  So a good judge – man or woman, of any religion or caste, of any region in India – is really liked by lawyers who are active in the courts.  That way, a judge is perhaps better placed than the holder of a political office like a minister in government.  A minister may have opponents, from his own caste or from any other, from his own party or from the Opposition, constantly scheming and trying to pull him down.  A judge, especially a High Court judge, cannot be ousted easily and he has only to deal with lawyers who appear before him – and not battle with opponents trying to trip him or see him out of office.  A judge is less hamstrung in his work by his religious, regional or caste backgrounds.

     So lawyers doing their cases in a court, especially a High Court, cannot have antipathy towards a good judge, whatever his background.  Since their work in courts brings them their daily bread they cannot feel otherwise – except for those not serious with their work or not seen much inside court rooms.  Like, for example, when I buy apples I would get good ones from a seller, whoever he is, rather than go for bad ones from a seller who belongs to my caste. Also, why have the founders of Microsoft and Google, who are Americans, employed Indians – Satya Nadella and Sundar Pichai – rather than Americans as chief executive officers in the US?  Because those businessmen feel that, at this time, their Indian officers would deliver best.  Lawyers who contest cases in courts think likewise, expecting results from judges hearing and deciding their cases.

     Those who fight predominantly about race, religion, gender or caste of a judge, pushing merit and good work in the background, are politicians who look for votes in a bickering about those issues.   But lawyers and clients concerned with cases in courts would care less about those things as they look for good judgements.  It is essential to see this difference – and to keep polluting effects of politics away from campuses of law colleges and law courts.

      Yes, sir.  Caste exists for real in Hindu society, with its wide baneful fallout on public life.  Solutions have to come from within that society, not outside. If at all we can solve them little by little, people should first see examples in the conduct of men and women at the top in many places, who talk less about caste differences, ignore some irritants here and there and go about their work gently with a smile – that is an art like writing a judgement. 

      Sir, there is yet another side.  When one parent seriously faults and fights with another in front of their children, the children feel left out and distressed.  That is how the lawyer community should feel today.  I think every parent must take care.

        Very warm regards.
                                               
R. Veera Raghavan

* * * * *

Copyright © R. Veera Raghavan 2016

10 comments:

  1. The article is very subtly worded. The author is a master at balancing between conflicting stands.

    ReplyDelete
  2. May be the article was written before Justice Karnan expressed regret for his remarks to the CJI as reported in the press. Nevertheless the question is not about his passing judgement in his own case but about the deep rooted feeling of being the oppressed class even today when such oppression has come down drastically if not completely weeded out.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Now with the judge's tracing back, nothing bad remains. Yet..................!!!!!!????

    ReplyDelete
  4. You need to be congratulated on writing on this sensitive issue.Keep up the good work.
    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  5. Very well written Sir. Whether the justice has apologized or not, he did express unwanted things. In the heart of heart, he thinks only of his caste & nothing else.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Very well drafted with no malice or malign but full of conviction to uphold the dignity of the POST and fervent expectation of the plaint and the advocate.

    ReplyDelete
  7. U have hit the nail on the HEAD. THOUGHT provoking.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I admire your honest, frank, straightforward views and convictions, Sir. This commentary is apt and thought provoking, no doubt.

    Recently I read the latest ‘The week’ magazine wherein the Chief Justice of India expressed his comments regarding the pitiable position of Indian Justice System : 16000 judges for the 3.2 Crore cases pending and 300 years required to clear the backlog. It is really a nightmare for the ordinary citizen expecting justice and resolution. He expects a lot from the Judiciary and there should not be any careless and whimsical judge.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It is sad that in India the caste is seen as the saviour even in case of eminent people - the judge rose to his position because of his knowledge and hard work but by saying these things he has demeaned himself more, than the institution he is representing. What faith a common man of another caste will have if they have to come before him for justice. is the judge really saying that he will judge differently for different caste?

    ReplyDelete
  10. sorry for the second post - there was another judge who mentioned that those who are against reservation are scoundrels - while I understand that the SC has a stand on this and the people abide by it, if a genuine case comes before this eminent judge, what would be the ruling one wonders. This is really a sickening state of affairs.

    ReplyDelete